Ted Says Scarlet Is Good For Weddings

[Tom Lowe]

What is the best prosumer HD camera right now for weddings, Jim?

I imagine the EX3 will be popular, but it's also kinda pricey.

 

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

Maybe RED should launch a reservation program for a possible interchangeable-lens Scarlet.

See what happens.

I'm instantly in.

 

[Lawrence Bansbach]

If my current cameras had a 3k image and an 8x zoom they wouldn't be in my arsenal. 8x really limits creativity! In an environment where you have to be unobtrusive, 8x zoom is not gonna cut it.

I would guess that a lot of weddings are shot with 1/3-inch cameras, where longer zooms aren't a problem. Problem is, a significantly greater range on a 2/3-inch zoom might make the lens too long and heavy. Similar problem with increasing the lens' speed -- increasing the diameter would bulk up the lens. And doing either would likely inflate Scarlet's price ("3K for $5.7K" doesn't have quite the same ring, does it?). I'm not saying that the preliminary lens specs won't change. I just think that Jim and Red must have already considered these issue and have designed the best possible compromise between cost and features. Sure, there's always room for tinkering, and more substantial changes if something doesn't work as planned, but a much longer zoom might be asking for too much.

 

[Jon Sagud]

Just to throw it out there guys.... a 1920 x 1080 crop on the sensor would provide the equivalence of a 20X zoom. Just sayin'.... :biggrin:

 

[Lexicon]

yeah seriously, and porno stars are usually tore up from the floor up to begin with, so HD is definitely going to be rough on a lot of porn stars.

Having said that, some of the European porn studios like MET or Private have some young Swedish babes or whatever that might pass the 1080p test. I think I will have to get some porn blurays for "research" purposes.

You'll have to wait a while. Most companies are making the transition to 1080p productions from 720p. Digital Playground is the only US studio that is actively shooting and editing in full 1080 resolution and that's because they ponied up over 100K for HD cameras from Sony or Panasonic. 720p is still the typical production resolution of the industry and will be for at least another year.

 

[Jim Klatt]

What is the best prosumer HD camera right now for weddings, Jim?

I imagine the EX3 will be popular, but it's also kinda pricey.

Well, of course it depends on who you ask, how they shoot, and how much money they have to invest. I use XH-A1's because of the tape-based workflow for archiving and affordability of media. For those that use tapeless, I think that the EX1 is getting popular
cause of its good low-light sensitivity.

I know there are better cameras out there, but it passes all my bench marks for shooting a wedding(most of the time), and I know that I won't be left shorthanded if the obstacles begins to change on the job despite planning(which happens all the time!). I get an image that I am happy with too.

Originally, I came from a VX2000 and DVX100a. I originally intended to go to the HVX200 since I loved the DVX so much, but for archiving and the price of P2 cards I just couldn't do it. Plus, the low-light sensitivity just wasn't good enough for the situations I often find myself in. I am very happy with my purchase, although I'd be happier if Apple would have native software to author Blu-Ray....

(Another important thing is that I use the Merlin steadicam more and more, and it needs some reasonable amount of light if I am going to be able to have the autofocus on.)

 

[Nathan Troutman]

The only way that the Scarlet camera will be good for weddings or other event video production is if it has VERY good low light sensitivity, inexpensive memory cards, and a zoom that is 12x at the very minimum.

I think you missed some of the comments people have made here about using a simple tele adapter. Optically it's much easier to work with tele-adapters than wide-angle adapters.

Yes 8x isn't great but the point people have been making here is the most important thing is having a really nice wide end. The easy solution is to just buy a screw-on tele-adapter that will give you the extra zoom you want. Low-light sensitivity is very important but I'm sure you've already made changes in how you shoot coming from the see-in-the-dark VX-2000 to the much slower HD options including the XH-A1. Any comments about the sensitivity of Scarlet are pure speculation at this point. So wait and see. The CF cards are already pretty cheap at $200. A lot better than P2 cards. But again wait and see.

The real deciding factor is going to be, of course, how good the image is. 3k and RAW are pretty powerful points for Scarlet. RAW alone will help to make the run-and-gun style of live action (weddings, etc.) much easier to get right since you can fix many mistakes that happen in a non-destructive manner. No more compressed video footage. Let's face it Jim low-light is a huge issue for HDV because the compression really starts to fall a part when the light isn't strong. It's not that these cameras don't have the sensitivity to shoot low-light it's also that the compression doesn't like these situation.

 

[Jim Klatt]

I think you missed some of the comments people have made here about using a simple tele adapter.

I saw it. I used to use one on the Vx2000 and it is just too much changing back and forth which killed my reaction time. It drove me nuts constantly switching. It would work fine for non-wedding stuff though.

You are right about CF cards being more affordable. However I still don't know where in the world I'd be able to archive and organize all that footage.

I have to save every finished wedding for years with the mastered files. That's alot of weddings!

I also need places to dump TONS of unedited footage somewhere as weddings start pile up before I have a chance to edit them. I'll need those CF cards, so I would have to have external hard drive upon external hard drive to store the footage and finished archived weddings? Not for me.

Blu-Ray discs? Possibly, but Apple isn't there and might not even choose to go there so that isn't a reality.

Raw files are huge. I just don't think that storage is there for the wedding videographer yet. If there are solutions for that, I probably couldn't afford it until its been around for enough years to be affordable.

I certainly get a little amped when I hear about a camera like Scarlet; hell, I wouldn't be snooping around if it didn't. But as I get older I am less tantalized by technology that will force me to complicate my workflow or create new problems. I want things to be as streamlined as possible.

I probably will be blown away whenever some footage is released down the line, but the devil will be in the details in how it can be integrated into what is needed for my business to work.

 

[Priyesh P.]

You've got a year to either work yourselves up based on a lack of info or begin planning on how you're going to use the coolest personal motion capture device ever introduced to the market. Your choice.

So far I didn`t understand why it`s called a "motion capture device". Normally these are sensor-based devices to capture the actual position in 3D-space at a certain slice of time. Why do you say this instead of "motion picture device"?

 

[Michael Hastings]

Jim:

I don't think it will be a perfect wedding camera for you - you obviously have a very streamlined workflow geared toward giving people decent quality HDV video and that is fine, maybe more than enough for a lot of situations, but others may be more forgiving of some of the additional work to get higher quality. But the need to use an adapter lens occasionally and the digital workflow don't seem that huge - particularly as we move forward. That has always been true in wedding work. 15 years ago there were people that shot weddings on S-VHS and there were others that shot on Betacam. Obviously a huge difference in camera hassle, tape time storage, etc.

As far as archiving, my approach would be to choose an output format - e.g. 1080 blu-ray (it will probably be here before scarlet) and then offer the client the option of taking a harddrive filled with the raw footage. (a 500 gig bookshelf USB drive is about $100 these days) and simply put a sticker on it that advises the owner that harddrives may fail over time and they should find alternative (maybe just constantly newer harddrives) archiving solutions in a few years.

I think you missed some of the comments people have made here about using a simple tele adapter.

I saw it. I used to use one on the Vx2000 and it is just too much changing back and forth which killed my reaction time. It drove me nuts constantly switching. It would work fine for non-wedding stuff though.

You are right about CF cards being more affordable. However I still don't know where in the world I'd be able to archive and organize all that footage.

I have to save every finished wedding for years with the mastered files. That's alot of weddings!

I also need places to dump TONS of unedited footage somewhere as weddings start pile up before I have a chance to edit them. I'll need those CF cards, so I would have to have external hard drive upon external hard drive to store the footage and finished archived weddings? Not for me.

Blu-Ray discs? Possibly, but Apple isn't there and might not even choose to go there so that isn't a reality.

Raw files are huge. I just don't think that storage is there for the wedding videographer yet. If there are solutions for that, I probably couldn't afford it until its been around for enough years to be affordable.

I certainly get a little amped when I hear about a camera like Scarlet; hell, I wouldn't be snooping around if it didn't. But as I get older I am less tantalized by technology that will force me to complicate my workflow or create new problems. I want things to be as streamlined as possible.

I probably will be blown away whenever some footage is released down the line, but the devil will be in the details in how it can be integrated into what is needed for my business to work.

 

[Jon Sagud]

So far I didn`t understand why it`s called a "motion capture device". Normally these are sensor-based devices to capture the actual position in 3D-space at a certain slice of time. Why do you say this instead of "motion picture device"?

I just made it up ;-)

"Motion picture device" or "digital cinema camera" works great for me. Whatever you do, don't call it a video camera.

 

[Jim Klatt]

As far as archiving, my approach would be to choose an output format - e.g. 1080 blu-ray (it will probably be here before scarlet) and then offer the client the option of taking a harddrive filled with the raw footage. (a 500 gig bookshelf USB drive is about $100 these days) and simply put a sticker on it that advises the owner that harddrives may fail over time and they should find alternative (maybe just constantly newer harddrives) archiving solutions in a few years.

The reason wedding videographers keep the weddings archived is not just for the clients' sake. It is used to come back to for advertising purposes to to include in DVD demos/web adverts/downloadable clips, etc.

Wedding videographers make alot of their money off of happy, former customers coming back for you to additional work on their weddings. I cannot tell you how much business I get from this. If all of that source material is gone, then so is the business.

As far as giving them drives so that they could be responsible, I believe that this would be a major business repellent. Joe Blow customer will most likely have no way of doing anything with this footage with their computers/software if they even have one that can handle it. They won't know what to do with it. It would be just a paperweight. Plus, what if something goes wrong with the drive? They are screwed. The reason
that good word-of-mouth is generated for business is for all aspects of the business, not just the visuals. I cringe at the thought of telling a customer during a meeting that the backup for their wedding is a drive that might fail over time. Yikes!

Imagine if you were getting married and you hired a photographer who told you that your backup discs of the digital photos might fail over time and that they are also responsible for updating the media so that it would be compatible with future technology.

I am offering up my advice because I think it would be helpful for people at Red to know what a wedding videographer thinks about when researching cameras to integrate into their business...not to be a killjoy. Just some real-world, constructive examples. I'd love to have 3k raw, but you cannot ignore the myriad of other issues that could come along with some of the proposed, hypothetical tech specs for us wedding vendors.

If a demographic of potential customers might have to pass up Scarlet when it comes out, why not hear about it now before they make it available to buy. I am pretty sure that is what these forums are about. I know they are also about excitement and enthusiasm, which is excellent. That buzz probably motivates the people working at Red. Cheers!

 

[Joseph Hutson]

"digital cinema camera" works great for me. Whatever you do, don't call it a video camera.

I think Tom might have something to say about this pretty soon.

 

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

Digital fixed cinema camera.

 

[Joseph Hutson]

Digital fixed cinema camera.

HAHA! It used to be messed up but now it is fixed!

 

[Tom Lowe]

Digital fixed cinema camera.

Hahaha.

 

[Erasmus]

Scarlet Digital fixed cinema camera with a wide wide lens :whistling:

EDIT: Give us a wide and you can count me in for at least 2 of these Scarlets

 

[Michael Hastings]

Originally Posted by AquaVideoRed206
My push would be for a wider starting point for the on camera zoom. IMHO one of the flaws of ALL of the current consumer/prosumer cameras is they are not wide enough. It is MUCH easier to make a fixed lens zoom more telephoto with high quality telephoto converters than it is to make them wider because you have issues with vignetting and further degradation at the corners when trying to make it wider.

NAILED IT. Zoom factor is for stickers that sway ignorant point-and-shoot buyers. Wide angle is truly useful for WAY more situations than zoom, which those same unfortunate buyers inevitably find. As depicted, Scarlet is a very small camera, not something you're going to be holding stable on your shoulder. Massive amounts of zoom? Worthless.

I would argue that a camera like Scarlet needs wide angle even more than larger cameras do, simply because of the places it'll be deployed: vehicles, tight spaces, POV rigs. Long telephoto isn't worth a damn in any of these applications. Nor is it worth anything in discreet indoor shooting, family gatherings, indoor sets... I doubt it'd be worth much underwater either (some of the experts can weigh in on that).

The point about the quality of aftermarket adapters is good too. The wide-angle ones suck, period. Totally unacceptable.

These things are supposed to have wireless control. Wedding photogs can mount one on a church fixture up front, bump the data rate down a little for plenty of recording time, and trigger it when the bride & groom get up to the altar. At the same time, use a second camera to get the shot that isn't easily achievable today: From behind and above the couple and priest/rabbi, looking out over the crowd with the couple in the foreground. What do you need for that? Wide angle and a discreet camera.

Scarlet Digital fixed cinema camera with a wide wide lens :whistling:

EDIT: Give us a wide and you can count me in for at least 2 of these Scarlets

Stokestack and Erasmus - let's keep hammering on the wide angle issue. The point about pov and cars is excellent and I don't think having a greater wide end limits it for everyday mass market family use. The same thing is true there - most times you are shooting in tight spaces like living rooms, dining rooms, etc. for birthdays, etc. For the occasional little league baseball game, recital, etc. an add on telephoto is quite workable. Decent ones would probably be $200-300 and $700 - 800 should provide a really top quality one.

 

[Michael Hastings]

It's time for RED 4k samples to be posted!?!?

It's time for RED 4k samples to be posted!?!?

Don't forget Pr0n.

Isn't it time for RED 4k sample pron to be posted!?!?

 

[Hitman Jr]

Wedding videographers make alot of their money off of happy, former customers coming back for you to additional work on their weddings.

What? I've been in the industry since '94 and you are the first person I've ever seen make such a claim. Oh you can pick up a few bucks cutting some footage from a wedding of a person who is having a birthday, anniversary or has died and the family wants to cut a funeral video, but I'd say this is less than 5% of total customers. Now if you are talking referrals for sisters/brothers/cousins etc then there is money to be made there, but not re-purposing previously edited wedding videos.

I cannot tell you how much business I get from this. If all of that source material is gone, then so is the business.

I'm very interested what exactly are you doing?

I cringe at the thought of telling a customer during a meeting that the backup for their wedding is a drive that might fail over time. Yikes!

I do exactly that. The longevity of DVD-Rs are a myth, they rot within 5 to 10 years. I tell all my clients, check the dvds once a year at least. Rip the DVD folders to your hard drives, create multiple copies. WHatever they want to do... The last thing I want is some bride calling me up screaming their DVD won't play and it's their only remaining copy and I find out my archive copy is corrupted too. In fact last fall I spent several days creating new copies of everything we had dumped on DVD from 99 to 2003. About 30% of that was already corrupted, lost. On top of that with the recent spikes in the divorce rate, I don't even know if these couples are still married. I'd rather arm the client with the knowledge of how to preserve their memories for future generations and free up basement space for my own memories. Yes I will tell them their DVDs will fail or their hard drives or whatever.

Imagine if you were getting married and you hired a photographer who told you that your backup discs of the digital photos might fail over time and that they are also responsible for updating the media so that it would be compatible with future technology.

We as consumers are responsible for this in many aspects of our lives already. Being the archive for your customers costs money. Are you being adequately compensated for being that storage facility? Many wedding videographers barely charge $1000 a wedding at those prices I'd say the people who need to be responsible are the consumers. If you want to incur the costs of keeping their materials up to date and in storage, that's up to you. It's not something I'd recommend. The majority of people you will never hear from again. Heck I had a bride in 2006 file for divorce 2 weeks after the wedding and whe the edit was completed a month later refused delivery. I'm not going to store her materials, that's a waste of my money. And you don't know how many couples of yours are now divorced either.

On to other issues rasied:
Tape, it's days are numbered, that is just the fact. Videographers like photographers before them are just going to get used to that. I recommend dual mirrored servers, I'm not sold on the durability of portable drives, I like rebuidable mirrored arrays. A main server to feed the material for editing and a second one to store copies. Two terrabytes of storage is below $400 and basic computers to act as storage are dirt cheap.

8X zoom. I know someone said crop the footage, but no. It is hard enough to train people how to frame properly in the run and gun situations we are in. I want to be able to tell a newbie that, when looking at the safe zone lines on the monitor, this is what the picture should look like... I don't have the time or make the money to sit there and decide how the image needs to be cropped to create the equivalent of a 12x zoom or hope that the shooter took that into consideration when shooting so it will be properly framed.

Event and wedding work is run and gun with low profitablity. The "development" of the Red Code Raw will already be adding time to the process, cropping and zooming is just oging to be another headache none of us need. Without at least a 10x, preferrably a 12x zoom on the camera the 8x is a deal breaker for me.

Yes I know of screw on adapters, but once again they have their own costs and problems not the least of which is they increase the amount of light needed for a good image. And no, I don't mind the fixed lense, I have shot with those for 14 years, just give me something with a better zoom!

What cameras tend to dominate this market: the PD and VX line from Sony is still dominant. The HVR-V1U and HVR-Z1U have dominated the HDV early adapters for a while. The EX1 is getting a lot of talk but it's price puts it outside of most W&E videographers' reach. I'd say for the next year the z7u will be the one gaining the most market share. I'd guess that the JVC line of HDV cameras are behind the SOny products next with Panasonic and Cannon pulling up the rear.

The wedding and event market is a huge market and Red could make a large chunk of money off of it with the Scarlet! WEVA.com has a camera committee that I know could offer a lot of good ideas about what we need in a camera to service this market and I wish Red would take them up on it.

But most of all the workflow needs to be streamlined enough that there are very few detours in getting the work done. We work on very tight budgets with a desire for a quick turn around. Cropping images in post to frame and zoom just isn't going to cut it in my opinion! Of course Red could have already decided to increase the zoom and we don't know about it but since we don't know, this is my advice. Call WEVA please! :biggrin: